HEMPSTEAD—An East Quogue woman is seeking $70 million in damages from Suffolk County and Southampton Town law enforcement agencies, charging that she was wrongfully arrested and detained after taking photographs near the entrance to the Air National Guard base in Westhampton last July with two guns and dozens of rounds of ammunition in her car.

Filed in U.S. District Court in Central Islip last Thursday, July 29, the federal lawsuit also alleges that Nancy Genovese, 54, a mother of three who has lived in East Quogue for more than three decades, was the victim of assault and malicious prosecution when she was detained by authorities on the shoulder of Old Riverhead Road for nearly six hours on July 30, 2009, before being arrested. The criminal charge was later dropped.

The litigation charges that the arresting officers—who included Southampton Town Police Lieutenant Robert Iberger and Suffolk County Undersheriff Joseph T. Caracappa, among others—repeatedly referred to Ms. Genovese as “a right-winger” and “tea bagger” because of her political beliefs. “They saw the cross around my neck and asked if I had been to any tea parties,” she said. “I went to a tea party—I told them that.”

Ms. Genovese said she is a registered Democrat, though Suffolk County Board of Election records do not list her as registered with any political party, according to Suffolk County Democratic Party Commissioner Anita Katz.

Ms. Genovese, who was returning home from a shooting range on the night of her arrest, said she stopped near the base’s entrance to take photos of the decommissioned helicopter there for a patriotic “Support Our Troops” website that she had been working on at the time. Authorities said they found 500 rounds of ammunition as well as an XM-15 assault rifle and a shotgun inside her car.

Ms. Genovese noted that both weapons, which are legal firearms, were properly stored inside her car, and that the responding officers illegally searched her car—a point also made in the lawsuit. The litigation also notes that there were closer to 140 rounds of ammunition in her car.

“To be labeled a terrorist isn’t right,” Ms. Genovese told reporters during a press conference held last Thursday morning at the law office of her attorney, Frederick Brewington, in Hempstead. “I’m a patriot,” she added, becoming emotional almost immediately after addressing the media.

When reached earlier this week, Southampton Town Attorney Michael Sordi said that he had not yet been served with a copy of the lawsuit and declined to comment further. Christine Mamalfi, attorney for Suffolk County, said that while she has not yet seen the lawsuit, the county will “vigorously defend itself and the taxpayers in court.”

Ms. Genovese, who says she is retired, was eventually charged with one count of criminal trespass in the third degree, a misdemeanor, and spent five days in Suffolk County Jail in Riverside, including four days on suicide watch, before posting $50,000 bond. The charge was dropped by the Suffolk County district attorney’s office in November.

The lawsuit itself outlines 14 specific complaints that she is leveling against the defendants, and states that Ms. Genovese, who says she suffered both physical injuries and emotional distress during the ordeal, is seeking $5 million in damages per count—a grand total of $70 million. If she is successful, Ms. Genovese said she would invest all of her money into her website, patriotlegaldefense.com. She said it is a resource for those who are wrongfully arrested.

“The dollar amount is representative of the importance of Ms. Genovese’s case,” Mr. Brewington said. “What a jury would award is yet to be seen, but we’re allowed to put an amount in.”

He explained that the case will probably not go to trial for at least a year. The defendants have 30 days from the filing of the lawsuit to respond to the charges before the proceedings can continue, according to Mr. Brewington.

“Ms. Genovese has decided to engage in what will be a long process to seek justice,” he said.

According to Ms. Genovese, officers interrogated her for six hours near the entrance of the Air National Guard base before arresting her on the trespassing charge. She said she was also questioned by officials with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security, but they did not charge her with a crime.

“They kept asking me why I was there, what about the guns and why I was taking the pictures,” Ms. Genovese said. “I had no intention of going into the base.”

Once taken into the custody of local authorities, Ms. Genovese said her legs were shackled together and she was told that she would be charged with being a “terrorist.”

Could you show where in the law it says you "must" go directly home from a shooting range once done? The guns obviously weren't a legal issue as there were no charges related to them and they were returned once the bogus trespassing charge was dropped.

Right....because if you own a gun you are obviously a criminal and need to run home to hide from the long arm of the law....Is this even serious? She has the right to own a gun, we have that right for a reason mate, read up on your history.

She will have to prove that there was in fact $13000 in that bag, she will get something for her trouble but I doubt it will be 70 million she is seeking. As for no longer feeling safe...she should be fine as long as she steers clear of parking at the base.

The defendants will probably get off via the Patriot Act (whether that is right or not).

As for her $70,000,000 is absurd and the fact that she is asking for so much money shows that she is going for a money grab - well, the lawyers are and she agreed to it. I know that Lawyers will say you always ask for the maximum even if you know you aren't going to get it, but it makes you look greedy (not saying you are, just how it is perceived).

As for her arrest and charges, it's not ...morethat far fetched. I wasn't there so I can't say that everything was done legally (I doubt that the woman would claim that she had her guns locked and in the trunk if they were out in the open), BUT there was a lot of circumstantial evidence that would raise red flags to responding officers.

A woman taking photos of a government base from the side of the road (and who probably was defensive upon initial questioning [and who wouldn't be? She felt she wasn't doing anything wrong but was accused as such]), who had serious weapons with tons of ammo AND $13,000 in cash on her person (who pays tuition in cash anyway? Isn't a check MUCH safer?). I don't think it was unreasonable for the police to do what they did and again, are covered under the patriot act.

Good luck lady, you'll need it. You have a better chance @ suing for defamation of character.

She had been told previously to not take pictures of the base: factShe had an Assault Rifle and a Shotgun with 500 rounds of ammo: factShe had $13,000 cash in her car: fact (a deposit in a bank of more than $10,000 requires a CTR form which is filed with the IRS because that much cash is suspicious)This country is at risk of terrorist attacks, domestic or otherwise: factThere is a law called the Patriot Act that allows a suspected terrorist ...moreto be held indefinitely without explanation: fact

It's called personal responsibility and situational awareness. She apparently had valid explanations for the camera/gun/cash but it needs to be properly and thoroughly investigated by the government before releasing her back into society.

How thick are you? Her being held in jail for 5 days had nothing to do with the Patriot Act and it's provisions for unconstitutional detainment of American citizens.She was held in jail on a Trespass charge which was dismissed, which equals the court saw it as she didn't do it!

Yea, because ESL classes are so terrible... what with teaching immigrants (legal and otherwise) english (as a second language, because they already speak in a language from their country of origin) and everything. They should just be thrown into a regular class room and sink or swim baby!

A loose cannon? I guess people like George Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Paine also sound like loose cannons to you? We have gun rights for a reason, read up on your history a bit. Shes got the right to have her guns with her, she has the right to be angry about be detained illegally.

hey Mr. Z... don't be so hard. Remember, she was coming back from the GUN range, and EVERYONE knows a terrorist would never actually practice shooting their gun to become more proficient...

While it's "unfortunate" an "innocent" woman had to be dragged through all of this, you have to be smart enough to not put yourself in this position in the first place. If I were going to take photos of a police station for a website (or whatever reason) I surely would make sure I removed my $13,000 ...morecash and guns/ammo from my car before doing so. You have to expect to have someone question what you're doing.

The police shut down the Throgs neck just this morning because of a "suspicious vehicle". It turned out to be nothing, but that one in Times Square certainly was something worth being worried about... better to be safe than sorry.

Yes they did! Think about it 1) she was taking photos in a NO photo Area 2) she had assault rifles and ammunition in her car and 3) she claims $13,000 in cash. If in fact they hadn't detained her and later placed her under arrest and she started shooting at the base and killing people after ALL the terrorist attempted attacks people whould be saying " the police didn't do their job. They let a terrorist go free". So with how the world is today it's better to be safe than sorry. She says she lives ...morein fear she caused the fear. I hope the jury laughs in her face.

Law enforcement didn't do their job they stepped over the line. If she broke the law as far as taking photos in a no photo area why was she not charged for that action? The trespass charge if it was to have been for her photo taking actions, was dismissed. What does that tell you about it's legality and validity? 5 days in jail on 50,000 bail for trespassing? After violating her 4th amendment rights against search and seizure. The guns may not be popular with many people who are condemning ...moreher for this incident, but fact is they were legal and being legally and properly transported. You may not agree with her choice to own or operate them, but it is her right. The cash just doesn't make sense though, maybe she doesn't trust banks, which in this day and age isn't entirely unreasonable. Carrying that amount of cash around in unreasonable.

Law enforcement didn't do their job they stepped over the line. If she broke the law as far as taking photos in a no photo area why was she not charged for that action? The trespass charge if it was to have been for her photo taking actions, was dismissed. What does that tell you about it's legality and validity? 5 days in jail on 50,000 bail for trespassing? After violating her 4th amendment rights against search and seizure. The guns may not be popular with many people who are condemning ...moreher for this incident, but fact is they were legal and being legally and properly transported. You may not agree with her choice to own or operate them, but it is her right. The cash just doesn't make sense though, maybe she doesn't trust banks, which in this day and age isn't entirely unreasonable. Carrying that amount of cash around in unreasonable.

"Law enforcement did their job" assuming that it is the responsibility of police to trample the most important of our constitutional rights. Rather be safe than sorry? No, its innocent until proven guilty; as soon as things are the other way around tyranny sets in, its happened throughout history.

1)Taking photos from a public road is not a crime, within the base is the "no photo area". 2) She had "assault" rifles in her car, which is part of one her most important constitutional rights, try really hard to remember why our founding fathers thought it was so important to have the right to bear arms. 3) Believe it or not, to some $13,000 is a trivial sum; this is really beside the point as its no one else s business but her own. As a former Marine it saddens me to see what you people think ...moreis justified by said "terrorists". The war on terrorism is a joke, a really sad one, but a joke nonetheless. She was detained illegally, you people should be up in arms about this, start questioning what the role of government and law enforcement should be!

She was repeatedly warned NOT to engage in the behavior which got her arrested, questioned base personnel about matters of national security, and made herself known to not only base personnel as a potential threat, but to local law enforcement as well.

She was held for those five days, because of her "performance" at her araignment, and the judge ordered her held for "psychiatric observation".

Thank you Elliot for asking, prepare for a long winded (but not long enough) response. The so called Al Queda, which translates to "the base" is a colloquialism for "the toilet". Al Queda was originally the name of a computer database in a government computer (you can verify this information easily). We armed the so called terrorists and trained them to fight communism under Bush Senior, don't believe me? Well the guys responsible for it for it were so proud and cocky that you can read all about ...moreit, even look up old interviews on it. You might find "The Grand Chessboard" by Brzezenski to be helpful on the subject, these men who created the so called terrorists advised Bush jr. and Obama as well. If you want proof, here's Obama openly admitting his ties to our government http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASlETEx0T-I . At a crime scene a detective first questions witnesses and uses the little bit of fact he has to determine if everyones story checks out, if someone is lying then they are likely guilty; I am referring to the bogus statements in the 9-11 commission report, please see "Loose Change ; Final cut" free to watch on You tube. Read common sense by Thomas Paine and examine the world today, Read "1984" by Orwell and do the same. Examine our society and you will find we are taxed illegally by a growing government that spends our money on whatever they please, the National Federal Reserve prints out new money without restriction which places an invisible inflation tax on us, the government has slowly been banning more and more firearms and are gradually disarming the citizens of this country, We are in two wars that we shouldn't be in, We lied about "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to justify invading Iraq. When we found out there were no weapons we didn't leave, instead we changed the name of the war in Iraq to "peace keeping mission". Our government ignored the people of Arizona when Mexicans invaded, killing Americans, they even gave them 90 miles of Arizona back and refused to assist the sheriff. Obama gave an "executive order" which legalized the assassination of American citizens (read all about that one, very interesting). All Veterans are put on a terrorist watch list now, all "right wing extremists" are openly called terrorists and the people of this country are too dumb to see whats happening. They have stripped us of our rights and freedoms, all in the name of protecting us for "Terrorism", i misspoke when i said they didn't exist; terrorists are in the white house. Please Elliot, get mad, get really mad, and look up all of these facts. Read "confessions of an economic hitman" for even more good times. Peace

I am a wife of someone who works at the Base and when we came to this Base in 2008, we wanted to park and take pics of that same helicopter and they told us that we could not take pics of any part of this base. They told us it was for the safety of the base and personal. It was in effect back then. So I believe they did their job right and called her on it. When they saw the guns and ammo they responded fast to a case of possible terrorist. It can be a woman or man these days! This woman wants a ...morepay off for what? The police did their job. It is a hoot what she is asking and if she gets anything its because she is using the WOMAN card and not because she deserves it for her fear. LOL that just makes me laugh she is afraid to go by there, where will her guns be? At home?? I doubt that very seriously... i would keep all eyes on that woman and where she is getting all that cash from??? Guns, money, ammo???? Sounds fishy for sure

If the police did their job wouldn't the charge have stuck? It seems they failed by locking an innocent person up for 5 days on a bogus charge. I think they were right to check her out and verify her story, to ascertain whether or not she was in fact a "terrorist" which would be highly unlikely, being that she was stopped on the side of the road in broad daylight taking these pictures. A "terrorist would likely have their guns at the ready not stored in the trunk, following the proper procedure ...morefor transport. Besides the terrorists we need to worry about aren't likely going to be using guns to harm us, They like car bombs, IEDs and airplanes. They should have checked her out verified her identity and right to have those weapons. The if the photos were an issue confiscate the memory card. Then release her as she posed no threat.

explain that logic to those who died in the domestic (some would say muslim) terrorist attack at Fort Hood.

The shooter was properly trained and by all accounts lived on the right side of the law (and was an employee of the US military). Many people saw signs that something might be amiss but gave him a pass.

"The police did their job". No, it is not the Job of the police to round up absolutely anyone who possesses a gun or is possibly a terrorist. The thing is, ANYONE can be a terrorist, so you think they can just round up whoever they like whenever they like? Sounds like Berlin in the 40's to me. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. Just to clarify, it is their job to protect and serve, not illegally detain and trample constitutional rights.

She has rights, illegals don't; completely different. For the sake of answering your question I have a very simple view on illegal immigration; I say our government should take some chalk (primitive, I know) and draw a line 100 yards from the American Border, anything that crosses it gets gunned down by Machine mounted AA12 loaded with double buck. Illegals don't have rights, end of story.

The article fails to mention how she has been a 'visitor' to the base multiple times previous to this one and that is why she was detained. My personal favorite of the article is the line about the cameras on the car pointed towards her. I guess while at the range she's never heard of the license plate reader cars the SCPD and the SCSO use.

who the hell carries an assault rifle, shotgun, 500 rounds of ammo and $13,000 cash, other than drug dealers? You were going to pay your kids tuition in cash? who are you kidding! Maybe the IRS sould investigate you, too.You really think this is typical behavior of a mother of three? And what purpose do you have to need to know how to shoot an assault rifle? Stop wasting my tax dollars with your frivolous lawsuits. Get some help before do something even more stupid (if possible) and really ...morehurt someone.

Who are you to determine what someone should or should not do with their time. Many people enjoy target shooting, if you don't that is fine. Anyone going to or coming from shooting range may be "carrying an assault rifle and shotgun as well as 500 rounds of ammo. Maybe more than just two weapons as the legal number you may transport is 19 so she was well within the law.

oooh please. her guns were unloaded and she was coming home from a shooting range....and why is it suspiciuos to pay tuition in cash, huh? can you do that? if you can than be quite. she was just taking a picture of a painted plastic helicopter, nothing to serious eh? so relax no ones hurting anybody :D

last time i checked it was not illegal to carry $13,000 in cash. the guns were registered. she was tossed in jail for 5 days on a trespass charge that was later dropped. she was basically tossed in jail because the SCPD did not agree with her political views. This is not Nazi Germany folks. He constitutional rights were violated. she may not get the $70 mil but she will get A LOT of TAXPAYER money. the SC DA should investigate the cops and if things were not done by the book they should be FIRED!

Finally you admit she was held in jail on the criminal trespassing charge, which was dismissed. This equals false arrest and malicious prosecution. The excessive bail will be addressed in the suit as well, I would imagine.

I'm sure the police did not arrest her because of her political views, as though carrying an assault rifle, shot gun, dozens of rounds of ammo & $13,000 in cash while taking illegal pictures of a US military base, and probably arguing and antagonizing the police while being questioned, weren't reasons enough to be detained. She says she doesn't feel safe after this incident, but I should feel safe with someone driving around with assault weapons in my neighborhood? Would you honestly feel safe ...morewith a neighbor like this? Wake up, just last year we had shooting sprees at Fort Hood, Virginia Tech & the immigrant counselling center in Binghamton, just to name a few. Try reading her myspace blogs, and all of her posts from last year, until here lawyers shut her up. Walking time bomb.

Guess what, all of those shootings were done with pistols. Your logic doesn't hold, because she owns a guns she is going to use it in an illegal manner or to harm someone. The statistics just don't support you phobia.

Well, the story states that she was on her way home from a shooting range so I can understand having the guns & ammo. They were all legal so I don't understand the negative comments about them. I would think that if any one of you were arrested and detained for five days, then having to post a $50,000 bond to get out, all for a simple trespassing charge that wasn't even justified, you would be afraid to go out also.

All her guns were legal. They were transported in a legal fashion. Also there is nothing wrong with having a camera either. Not to mention many people have cellphone cameras too. Last I checked this isn't a fascist nation is it? Or did something "Change."

Or did I get something wrong and she is really a female Rambo mom who is plotting to take over the world. Right......

They didn't "detain" her, they charged her with trespass, which didn't hold up in court. She was free to leave the jail upon posting $50,000. That isn't detainment, that is a wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution. The knew she wasn't a threat before she was removed the scene. If the photographs she took were so illegal why wasn't she charged with violating that law/policy?

"could border on sedition." This was about her cyberspace comments or was it? If it was then it seems as though her lawsuit may have some validity after all.If they aren't deemed seditious then they are covered under the first amendment. Once again she wasn't charged with anything relating to this.

"could border on sedition." This was about her cyberspace comments or was it? If it was then it seems as though her lawsuit may have some validity after all.If they aren't deemed seditious then they are covered under the first amendment. Once again she wasn't charged with anything relating to this.

She broke the law even though it seems like a small issue, its not, We need to be smart and vigillent in these times, Move on lady you were wrong sorry.Im not even going to mention the gun thats too easy

What law did she break? Why wasn't she charged with this law she broke? Obviously the trespassing didn't occur or it wouldn't have been dismissed.Please give your opinion on guns, not that it will be supported by any law or facts. Just your ignorance on the matter.You seem to be interested in laws being upheld. here is a comment you posted:

"Wow dont hold back gallery girl why dont you make youself a sign and go stand outside the 7 eleven in southampton in the mornings, with you ...morebuddy"

Sounds like you don't support our Federal immigration law, are certain laws optional when it comes to enforcement?Many illegal immigrants break more than just the one law upon entering, they add forgery and identity theft to their resume. Is this okay by you?

I WOULD LOVE TO REPLY PLEASE EXCUSE MY USING CAPS MY COMPUTER IS NOT HAPPY WITH ME EITHER. FIRSTLY ABOUT THE IMMIGRATIONA THING I JUST GOT MY GREEN CARD ABOUT A DECADE AG. i AM FROM IRELAND AND I CAME HERE AFTER COLLEGE TO WORK A SUMMDER HERE. I MET MY HUSBAND AND OBVIOUSLY GOT MARRIED AFTER A FEW YEARS AND I ENDED UP BACK PAYING BACK TEN GRAND BACK TAXE TO IRS, OF COUSE WITH A LOAN FROM IRELAND ( MY PARNETS LOVED THAT) BUT BACK TEN ALL IRISH RESIDENTS WERE PERMITTED TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY FOR ...moreTHREE TO SIX MONTHS. I DONT KNOW BUT IF YOU REMEMBER YEARS AGO EVEY SUMMER THE HAMPTONS WAS FULL OF IRISH STUDENTS ON THEIR J ONE VISAS WORKING AND TAXES FOR THE SUMMERS. BUY IN LAST FEW YEARS PRESIDENT BUSH DID SOMTHING TO CHANGE THIS AND ALOT OF I MEAN HUNDREDS OF THEM LOST THIER SUMMER VISAS. NOW THERE IS RUSSANS AN ROMANIANS AND POLISH. ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO DO WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THIND CAN PAY MONEY EVERY WEEK TO THE IRS BY APPLYING FOR A TAX ID NUMBER , YOU JUST HAVE TO GO TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU APPLY FOR YOU SSN ALOT OF PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THIS INCLUDING MY SELF SO THATS WHY I ENDED UP BACK PAYING TAXES, YOU CAN EVEN DOWN LOAD THE TAX ID NUMBER ON LINE. IN EUROPE ALOT OF THE COUNTRIES INCLUDING IRELAND THANKS TO THE EU HAVE TO PAY SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTSTO THESE REFUGEES INLUDING CHILDREN ALLOWANCE AND UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS TO THESE PEOPLE WHO DONT EVEN LOOK FOR WORK THEY GET PAID MORE THAN MY PARENTS DO FOR WORKING FULL TIME. SO ANYWAY HOPE THIS MY HELP YOU UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO IGNORANT THE SOLUTION TO THE DAY LABOURING PROBLEM MAY BE MANDTORY FINGERPRINTING , IDS AND TAX ID NUMBERS AND IF NY LAW IS BROKEN THEY ARE IMMEDIATLY DEPORTED. WE CAN SEE ITS WRONG UNTILL WE ARE BLUE IN THE FACE ITS NOT GOING TO CHANE THE PROBLEMSO LETS FIX THE PROBLEM NOT BY STANDING AND YELLING AT THE SEVEN ELEVEN CANT WAIT TO HERE FROM YOU

ABOUT THE TRESSPASSINGNEITHER OF US WERTE THERE SO WE HAVE TO BELEVE WHAT WAS REPORTED AT FIRST, AND ARE YOU KIDDING ME TWO WORDS ABOUT IN YOU WORDS DIDNT OCCUR OR IT WOULDNT BE DISMISSED I HAVE TWO WORDS TO SAY ABOUT THAT OJ SIMPSON. I REST MY CASE,

IF THESE LADY WAS ANY OTHER COLOUR OR RACE AND WAS SEEN OUTSIDE THE BASE, WITH A CAMERA,CASH AND GUN LEGALL OR NOT WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.

I was merely pointing out that ICARE seems to CARE about laws being broken in this case, but not in others.

Jul 31, 10 8:34 PM"so you think they can just round up whoever they like whenever they like?Sounds like Berlin in the 40's to me. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. Just to clarify, it is their job to protect and serve, not illegally detain and trample constitutional rights. "

where ...moredo you stand on illegal immigration? Would you apply the same standard?elliot (sag harbor)Total comments by elliot

Pot calling the kettle much elliot? How can you be so foolish as to accuse me of do something which you yourself had just done a little over 3 hours prior?

You resort to a personal attack by calling me a fool? That is weak and shows how you can't stick to this issues. You need to reread your response because nowhere in it did you address the "too easy' gun. Earlier you claimed I called you ignorant, but it is a lack of your understanding of the English language which caused you to misinterpret what I wrote. "Please give your opinion on guns, not that it will be supported by any law or facts. Just your ignorance on the matter." This is not saying ...moreyou are ignorant across the board, just that on the issue of guns and their legal possession and transportation you are ignorant. BTW, I don't watch any Court TV. I rarely watch TV in general.

chill dude when you relax Ill be happy to explain my self to you take it down a notch your really acting crazy, its a southampton blog the justice system doest even care or know what we are talking about, take deep breaths your boring me and prob everyone else when you cxome down well talk love icare

When transporting them in a car in this state the place for up to 19 of them is in the trunk. They were completely legit and shouldn't have been confiscated. Her son could have taken them home, but the police wanted to bust her chops. Now she is busting back.

As for guns killing people: Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat.

well for those of you have not heard of the 2nd amendment it was her right to have those weapons and the amount of ammo was more like 140 rounds not that it matters you can carry as much as you want as long as you are legally allowed to have the weapons and ammo and as for the cash who the hell cares how much you carry on you its none of the governments business or yours what a person does with their cash and in a so called "free' country one should be able to carry cash and weapons if they want ...moreto its just another example of our increasing police state and law enforcements strong arm tactics to scare the last few freedom loving people left in this country i have taken pictures of bases and military equipment if they are so worried about iit then they shouldnt put it out where every person that passes by can see it personally i think she deserves every penny of it and then some remember people like her keep you sheep safe and free not that most of you deserve it you all need to wake up and get with the program is this really the America you want to live in because its sure as hell isnt the America that i chose to serve thank you

No, but last time I checked the constitution was still intact. It sure seems to be when we want loitering day labors off our streets. I remember getting harassed by Police for skateboarding as a kid, but now it is okay to loiter as an illegal immigrant who should even be in the country? Hmmmmm

Not implying anything just curious as to the source of your claimed knowledge of terrorist thought processes. Once again I ask if it is illegal to take the photos, why didn't they charge her with that and if that is what the trespass charge was in relation too, why didn't it stick?

Go back and read who wrote that, it wasn't me genius. lol I apply the law equally to all, I would deport an illegal Irish, Polish, Russian, Israeli, English or any other nationality just as quick as someone from Mexico, Central or South America. For you to try and use the race card on me shows how pathetic your position is. I don't want anyone or any race, nationality or religion here illegally. I have friends of many different nationalities and races, but they all have one thing in common, ...morethe one who live here are LEGALLY here. Get it illegal isn't a race or nation, it's a status.

Once again I ask if it is illegal to take the photos, why didn't they charge her with that and if that is what the trespass charge was in relation too, why didn't it stick?

Fact remains, she HAD BEEN warned previously, and persisted in suspicious behavior.

Law enforcement was well within in their rights to detain, and investigate her. How many times have you heard of someone just snapping, and killing a slew of their co-workers? Post office, Wall St., other military bases, and elsewhere.

This woman played with fire, got burned, and now she wants to get paid for it.

Just what we need if she actually wins, another cup of McDonald's coffee...

"While not all the facts are in yet, we do know that according to law enforcement officials in Suffolk County, New York, Nancy Genovese, an unemployed single mother, had been reportedly scoping things out at the Gabreski base for weeks. According to Bill Mason of Newsday.com, members of the Air National Guard reported to law enforcement that the woman had been warned off the base before, after asking them questions about the base that they weren't at liberty to answer."

Any questions?

Jul 31, 10 6:46 AM appended by Mr. Z

"Caracappa also stated according to Crowley's article that during the arraignment of Genovese at the Southampton Town Justice Court on Friday, Genovese became "hysterical," thus prompting the judge to order her held for psychiatric evaluation."

When they first put the helicopter in front of the gate I stopped to take a closer look at it. I'm ex-military and was just curious and reminiscing. The first thing I noticed was a sign that stated that it was illegal to stop there. Why the hell would they put the helicopter there knowing that military buffs, or just anyone in particular would want to stop and get a closer look and take pictures. If they don't want people stopping at the front gate, don't entice them with things to make them stop. ...more

As far as Genovese is concerned, you can see that she is not working with a full deck. Some people get ideas and opinions and become so overzealous that it ultimately leads them into situations like this. Is it patriotic to disobey a military bases rules where signs are clearly marked? Can you imagine what would have happened if someone that remotely looked Arab was returning from the gun range with 2 rifles and ammunitions stopped in the same situatuion.

I am a veteran and other military bases have airplanes, helicopters and tanks on display off to the side of the front gate in an area set up for people to stop and take pictures. To put that helicopter smack dab in front of the entrance gate was a dumb idea. With all that space out there they could have put it off to the side so people who stopped wouldn't pose a threat to the front gate.

If it looks like a duck , quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, maybe she was a well...duck. If the police did not detain her and someone was hurt the press would be all over the authorities. She should have realized how her actions could be taken and visit the base unarmed and with permission to take pictures. Was she setting up the lawsuit then?

She was basically unarmed, consider how long it would take her to open her trunk, unlock her guns and ammo, then load them. The soldier at the gate has a loaded gun in a tactical holster on their thigh, as well as an automatic rifle probably a M4.

Exactly, you called her a whack job = you losing the argument.The second rate whack job was me being sarcastic about you comment and not directed at you personally. The pants wetting gun hater is you though.;-)

I'm sure her lawyers told her to hide it because her public comments will only hurt her case. After reading some of them, I'm confident that what she said to authorities during her questioning had more to due with her detainment than the original grounds.

The bottom line is that she wasn't minding her own business on her own property and was sujected to an illegal search and seizure - she brought this all on herself. The good news is that the authorities know about her now and she probably ...morehas a nice thick CIA file and is on the no fly list. The bad news is that she is still out there, free as a bird (God Bless America) with her sizeable chip on her shoulder increased by lawyers, with who knows how many guns, ammunition and fellow lunatic supporters. I am concerned about what will happen when she loses this case.

Nancy Genovese is reading these posts and adding her "Like" to the ones that shes does.

Knowing this, I will ask you directly, Ms. Genovese, "What in the bloomin' world did you THINK was going to happen to you after you illegally photographed a military base with an arsenal in your trunk.

Did you really think the police were going to say a polite, "Goodnight, Ma'am"?You're actions and motivations are so outrageously suspicious, it is no wonder at all that they held you. ...moreYou are a potentially dangerous person.

I mean, read the above post by Q333. Do you hear the ring of truth? I do.

Two guns is an arsenal? You are so hysterical is is amazing. People like you are the reason the NRA exists.

"You are a potentially dangerous person." This is a benign statement as any human being operating a motor vehicle is "potentially dangerous". Ease up on your support for thought crime and worst case scenario paranoia.

Whack job? for carrying two guns in a legally prescribed manor. for wanting to take pictures of the same helicopter that i have wanted to take pictures of! For being hysterical after being harassed,arrested ,detained in an unlawful manner by overzealous law enforcement . and she carried a large amount of cash,so what ! I would call her a whack job for spending 5 mil on a mcmansion that anywhere else is only worth 1 mil but not for any of the reasons that have been mentioned here. they can have ...moremy guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands..........

Yeah in other parts of the world, so your point is what? Kim Jong il wouldn't stand for it, so why should we? This is America still, I think. If it is as you say and she was detained for her rants, then the allegations in her lawsuit seem to have some factual support. You can't detain some one because you don't agree with their ideology if they haven't broken the law. Think about it, she was charged by the county for breaking a federal law, this makes no sense.

Her rants weren't why they stopped her though, it was for the picture taking, either way they were stupid to arrest her and charge her with something that wouldn't stick. True many people have ranted much less and committed far worse acts of aggression, the quiet ones are the ones you need to really worry about! Think of how unassuming most serial killers are.

Once she was picked up, the investigation into who she was began. We do have laws about applying cyberspace content in a court of law these days, and, it searching the net for content is one way we do find terrorists.

Fact remains, what she was doing for the umpteenth time was not legal, and she was warned to cease, and desist her involvement with the base. She could not. Read over Title 19, and it may change your tune.

This is The United States Of America . We are guaranteed Certain inalienable rights under the Constitution. one of those is free speech,another is the right to bear arms. Exercising these rights does not make you a criminal or a whack job. I may not agree with what she says , but I would die for her right to say what she wants. This is The United States Of America . Thank God !

Valid point, but don't forget in those countries you would not even have the right to say what you think as you are fortunate enough to do here, Be careful how quick you are to subjugate other's rights, for your rights could swiftly follow.

22 and fresh out of law school? Hmmmm graduate high school 17-18 + 4 years to a BA = 21-22 then 3 years law school = 24-25 minimum. Seems like you used some fuzzy math. Don't forget most of the lawyers working for the county couldn't get jobs in private firms.

mystcstar - You're welcome. Please do your self a favor and don't take the bait! Let your debating on this take place in the court room through your lawyers. In a forum where fact and law rule you will prevail. In here emotion and opinion rule, so it isn't worth jeopardizing a solid case.

Nov 20, 09 5:39 PM "This was the result of an under sheriff Caracappa who wanted his name in the papers, a media hungry under qualified person put in a job position he doesn't deserve."

Nov 20, 09 8:43 PM "I have a perfect background so they made up lies to "sell papers." "

Nov 20, 09 10:29 PM "It was not until Caracappa saw my Myspace page, in the middle of the night, with my political views that he ...moretold me I was under arrest, and he used a trumped up charge like trespassing 3 on a county road. its cost me a fortune to defend the charge. I paid to take it to trail. ".

Nov 20, 09 11:03 PM "He was flirting with me!!"

Nov 20, 09 11:18 PM :"I was arraigned Friday afternoon with bail left at 50,000.00. My sons were given the wrong time to be there with bail allowing them to keep me for the weekend. I was there 4 nights and 5 full days, until Monday Aug 3 about 5 pm."

Nov 21, 09 6:54 AM :"I was at peace driving home from the range, on that nice day with my roof down on my car, until I was stopped by police who ran out of donuts."

Nov 28, 09 11:06 AM "My book will be out in the Spring!!"

Nov 30, 09 9:08 PM "Actually I offered to make a 10,000.00 donation, now, of my own money, to the base, because Carlark and Caracappa made tthe troops so upset with their lies. My attorney told me not to."

§ 140.10 Criminal trespass in the third degree. A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when he/she knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building or upon real property (a) which is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders...

The rest is about schools, cities, and railroads, but, you get the point...

Aug 2, 10 10:43 PM appended by Mr. Z

"Air National Guard officials told The Press that, before her arrest in July, Ms. Genovese had been previously spotted on the base’s grounds and warned to stay away. Ms. Genovese said that while she had been to the base prior to her arrest, she had never been warned to stay away.
In Southampton Town Justice Court on November 17, Ms. Genovese signed an agreement stating that she understands that she is forbidden to enter the base in the future. If she violates the agreement, criminal charges would be filed against her, according to authorities."

Why a plea bargin? It says charges dismissed, not dismissed in satisfaction. She was on a public road on the opposite side of the road from the base. What she was doing doesn't meet the description of the charge. She may have been taking photos, but that doesn't fit the charge. The Air National Guard officials do not have jusristiction over CR31. The above statement is therefore irrelevant do to her being out of their juristiction at the time of this incident.

And that's the problem -- you haven't explained anything other than she makes you so nervous that she'd be unlucky to have you as a juror on her case, that you don't like what she's done at the airport, or posted to some social networking page, etc.

You haven't explained it because you can't explain it -- but I have every confidence that if you think calmly about it for a bit, you WILL be able to better articulate what it is about Nancy Genovese that makes you so angry and fearful.

This action is slam dunk for Genovese. She committed no crime and was arrested after an unconstitutional search by a politically prejudiced sheriff who deliberately slowed procedure so as to insure that she would spend the weekend in jail.

We will never know how much she is awarded since the case will never go to a jury determination but I hope she gets at least a mil. Enough so that the various local law enforcement agencies, (particularly the Sheriffs office), will hereafter follow ...morestrict Constitutional procedure rather than treat another innocent citizen as a criminal based on the misapprehension of one off-duty cop out of his jurisdiction and the capricious bias of the Sheriff.

Just to be clear, those "No Photography" signs date from the time when Gabreski airport was a functioning Air Force base in the '50s. They are superannuated and meaningless. There are, (or were when last I checked), other rusty signs on the decaying barbed wire of the perimeter of the airport that threaten shooting on sight if one trespasses. They, too, are meaningless.

There are very few places in the country where the presence of legal firearms in the trunk of a car would cause the knee-jerk prejudicial reaction that it has here. Elsewhere, most folks own firearms both for the pleasure of shooting and for protection from home invasion.

It would behoove local residents to consider the persuasive reasons for owning a firearm rather that to retain their ignorant prejudices.

Furthermore, if Genovese's allegations of Caracappa's behavior are borne out at trial, the County should fine and fire him.

Ya know, the saddest thing here is that, this paper provides a public forum for people to air their opinions and thoughts...it's a privilege. Some are seizing the opportunity to personally attack others that they don't even know...what the hell? We are all entitled to our opinions, it doesn't make us right or wrong. It's healthy to speak out. Personal attacks by cowards hiding behind an online name or silhouette is not. It's immature and diverts people from the topic. Please stop it.

Although in my opinion her actions, reactions and motivations (as reported) are entirely suspect, that does not guarantee guilt. The trial shall prove whatever facts need to be seen.

What I AM concerned about is how we, with our comments, can try a case before it ever reaches court. I know a public internet forum is legal ( and fun at others' expense), but it actually makes me very ...moreuncomfortable.

True, I'm not! It however doesn't mean that I am a racist gun nut as this all to predicable poster has claimed. Any time someone doesn't agree with him they are either crazy, racist or a Neo Con. All this does is drawn attention to his lack of facts or law to support his opinions. The guns were legal and not an issue, so we are labeled "gun nuts".

What does race have to do with it? She's dopey and made a mistake. The cops made a mistake too...there is blame to go around for all, but these are the times in which we live. The only winners here will be the attorneys.

This whacko sat in her car in an off-limits area with a trunk full of ammo and weapons and SHE is suing the town? If the judge who may eventually hear this case has any sense he will fine her for wasting the court's time and throw out the case!

Since when is County Road 31 an off limits area? She must have a pretty small trunk if a shotgun, AR15 and 140-500 rounds of ammo fill it up. She had 17 firearms under the legal limit in her trunk, that is right you can legally be in possession of 19 firearms outside of your home. Please don't hold your breath for the case to be thrown out, we would hate to lose you! lol

Ask the photographers who were photographing a base in Pennsylvania, with a telephoto lens from a hillside adjoining the base. They were doing a story for the NY Times, and even though they were not physically trespassing, their eyes and camera were, and they did not have base approval for the photos.

They were detained, arrested, and later given approval, and the story ran with approved photos.

There is no provision in the NYS penal code for this interpretation of Criminal Trespass 3. The PA base was probably also an actual Military Base, Westhampton is not. They were also photographing inside the base as you state, she was photographing an ornamental helicopter, which is outside of the gate and fences. It would be interesting to know if it is on the CR 31 right of way, because if it is there goes the one paddle the Town and County had!

Very different situations. You said their ...moreeyes and cameras were trespassing, cameras you could make a case for, but eyes you are blowing smoke.

NO ONE SHOULD BEABLE TO TAKE PHOTOS OF THIS AREA WITHOUT FULL CONSENT AND KNOWLEDGE WHEN PHOTOS ARE TO BE TAKEN. ANYONE THAT IS A TRUE MEMBER OF FREEDOM AND WHAT AMERICA IS SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT....SHE IS NOT FOR THE TRUE TEAPARTY SHE IS AN IMPOSTER!

Taking pictures of public places, you will be stopped and questioned. Why not with all the crazies out there. She should be thankful that she got stopped knowing that people want to set off bombs anywhere.What a country when you can sue for $70,000,000 and your in the wrong.

This story basically sums up everything thats wrong with this country. First, a woman breaks the law and due to words and actions is placed under sucide watch. Now she wants to cash in for the big payout? Are you kidding me lady? 70 mil to fund your website? Who are you - Steve Jobs? This lawsuit is an absolute waste of time and taxpayers money. If this woman was a real "patriot" she would admit her wrongdoings and just go quietly into the night.

SHE BROKE NO LAWS! THAT'S WHY THE CASE WAS THROWN OUT. I HOPE SHE SUES THE BALLZ OFF OF THEM AND GETS BIG MONEY. HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WERE CLEARLY VIOLATED. 5 DAYS IN JAIL FOR WHAT???? SHE WASN'T A THREAT. MANY OF YOU PEOPLE ARE FOOLS WITH YOUR LIBERAL VENOM SPEWING FROM YOUR ORIFICES.